IcePath icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
← New Search ↗ Social Card

Luke Jordan Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2002-06-05 Country: USA
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

NCAA D3 / D2

Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw PPG  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adjusted NCAAe-PPG  ·  ■ Green = actual college PPG
Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP G A Pts PPG NCAAe-PPG Age-Adj D3e-PPG Age-Adj
2021-22 — EHL 30 7 10 17 0.567 0.1216 0.1238 0.2775 0.2826
2022-23 Connecticut Nor'Easter EHL 45 7 13 20 0.444 0.0954 0.0922 0.2176 0.2103
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div Conference Year GP G A Pts PPG
2025-26 UMass Dartmouth D3 — JR 1 0 0 0 0.000
2024-25 UMass Dartmouth D3 — SO 8 0 1 1 0.125
2023-24 UMass Dartmouth D3 — FR 2 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

18%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#36662
Forward overall
#1703
Forward born in 2002
#1054
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Bob Kinne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Cody Marooney
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bradley Duwe
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jayson Angus
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.66 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nate Foster
Nichols · 2016-17
0.188 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Lane Paddison
Manhattanville · 2021-22
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brock Sawyer
Elmira · 2007-08
0.444 Average
actual D2/3 PPG

How to read this: NCAAe and D3e factors convert a player's junior PPG into expected NCAA scoring at the D1 or D3 level. Harder conferences → lower projected PPG for the same player. A strong junior player (e.g. USHL 0.90 PPG) will project much higher in NESCAC than Big Ten because the D3 scoring environment is lower-difficulty.

Strength factor: conferences above 1.0 are harder than average; below 1.0 are easier. The formula is: Base NCAAe PPG ÷ Conference Strength = Projected PPG.